RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Moderator: OSM

User avatar
Webdongle
Joomla! Master
Joomla! Master
Posts: 37282
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by Webdongle » Sun Feb 23, 2014 10:24 pm

AmyStephen wrote:...
The insinuations that have been made in this thread by some are not quickly forgotten ....
The 'insinuations'(as you refer to the comments) are a direct result of the lack of transparency by the OSM. Instead of being open and giving straight answers to valid questions ... the replies are full of rhetoric and totally avoid the questions.

Please stop making comments about peoples distrust and be more transparent. You may not 'quickly' forget some of the negative comments but there are users here who will not quickly forget your repeated attempts to beleaguer the required answers. Every time you make a post that avoids the questions and introduces irrelative arguments ... you feed the distrust that you so blatantly complain about.
http://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/
https://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/updating-joomla.html
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results": Albert Einstein

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by NivF007 » Mon Feb 24, 2014 4:17 pm

Not important who wrote this:
As far as some of these other comments, it's just more of that stuff you hate to see happening in a community. These suggestions that the board isn't accountable or transparent or listening or answering questions, the assumption you can find a real question that doesn't sound like "When did you stop beating your wife?"

The insinuations that have been made in this thread by some are not quickly forgotten and it does not erase insult to follow with kudos and claims of respect. This is why I shared that video
I think we need to grow up.

1) Directors need to be accountable and the operations of a not-for-profit transparent to engender trust. It comes with the territory.

From OSM's about us page
OSM will also engage in regular self-assessment to ensure it is accountable to Joomla!, acting in Joomla!'s interest and ensuring that it is the right shape and size to support Joomla!.
[emphasis added]

Where there is 'mistrust,' questions from the community or concerns expressed, accountability means that either a) there are good answers for; or b) there is an acknowledgement that these areas need to be addressed.

2) There are obvious issues and concerns, gaps between what's set out in the by-laws now and what takes place in practice, including how OSM needs to be to move forward.

This is not akin to 'mistrust of directors' - it's about asking pertinent questions and having a discussion of those issues, where the gaps are and how OSM can move forward.

A lot of people don't even know about the Governance Working Group - I do not see mention of it on the OSM web site. I believe a description of the GWG on the OSM web site and an invitation to participate there would go a long way to answering questions, helping to alleviate concerns and providing transparency.

Why not list this under the OSM FAQ's as well - (i.e. What efforts at OSM are currently going on to move towards membership acceptance and elections for OSM Directors? and How can one join the Governance Working Group?).

That group appears to me to be doing great work! Let's make sure people in the community are aware of that.

3) "insinuations that have been made in this thread by some are not quickly forgotten"

Grow up. Honestly.

--

Where I feel we can move forward:

1) I don't see, from the information that I've received, that there is any 'wrongdoing,' or 'mal-intentions' on the part of any OSM Director - quite the opposite.

Among other emails of the same nature, and in response to a post on the dev thread, I've received emails from people in the community which state
OSM has been a closed, in-bred, self-serving group since they "stole" control of Joomla!!!!
So the perception is there, at least by some. Whether this perception is true or not, I do not personally know. I do know that personally, I have not been satisfied with the answers.

However, instead of getting upset about these comments, I have yet to see OSM Directors demonstrate clearly for anybody that the above concerns are not warranted - assurances are great - but outside of personal assurances, is there any Director on the OSM Board that can do so?

If not, then I would respectfully and politely suggest that it is

a) correct to express those concerns; and

b) a good thing for any OSM Board member to recognize that in order to gain the trust of the broader community, that these questions need good answers.
These suggestions that the board isn't accountable or transparent...the assumption you can find a real question that doesn't sound like "When did you stop beating your wife?"
Seriously?

Here is the sum total of the accountability and transparency for OSM elections on the OSM Web Site
10. How are the directors of the board appointed?

In future, the directors of the board will be elected by the members of Open Source Matters.

11. Who oversees the board?

The board was previously overseen by a structure called the Community Oversight Committee (COC).
In other words, the OSM Board is, as a matter of fact, right now a) closed; b) self-appointing; and c) without oversight - by it's own admission.

In response, folks are expressing legitimate concerns - their concerns. They are stakeholders. They have every right to subject 10 and 11 above to scrutiny, to challenge the current circumstances - and to request accountability from OSM Directors to include a clearly defined pathway for change.

This is not akin to asking a director a question such as "So when did you last beat your wife."

This is not akin to 'mistrust' of the current directors.

This is not akin to 'bullying.'

This is not akin to making 'insinuations.'

It's simply what responsible and attentive stakeholders do.

---

My thoughts are as follows:

OSM Directors need to acknowledge the issues of concern and communicate how they are addressing this matters.

Points 10 and 11 above come from the Frequently Asked Question on the OSM web site - so it's safe to assume that OSM recognizes these very questions are being 'frequently asked' by the community.

I believe that there are truly remarkable people serving as OSM Directors, so my hope quite simply, is that on OSM's next regular self-assessment as to how they can be more accountable to the community - Board Directors simply acknowledge that these concerns exist and come up with appropriate solutions.

Accountability and transparency means that you are able to acknowledge the concerns and provide clear and concise answers, when requested and in an easy to find place.

For example, there is a lot of information that people do not know

a) The structure of governance for OSM and Joomla! Working Groups. In fact, the very classification of OSM as Joomla! Working Group gives one the impression that OSM is subordinate - when it is not.

OSM is self-governing. Importatnly, OSM is also responsible for accepting money (which can be large sums) and distributing money, on behalf of the entire Joomla! Community - but yet it is a 'self-appointed' 'self-governed' small group of Directors with zero oversight, people, most of whom have personal financial interests in Joomla!

This is not an insinuation - it is a fact - and a circumstance that needs to be dealt with.

It is natural that the broader community would subject such a circumstance to scrutiny and criticism.

This set up is not 'typical' of not-for-profit membership based groups. It is toxic and it is dangerous.

In the event, and this is speaking purely hypothetically, that OSM were to be defrauded by directors (which would mean that money would not go for the intended purposes of OSM), a post mortem report would identify the failure to address the current circumstance as the primary factor which allowed such events to happen.

Again, no 'insinuations' are being made.

Responsible stakeholders address these matters head-on.

Accountable and diligent Directors have good answers.

N

User avatar
Webdongle
Joomla! Master
Joomla! Master
Posts: 37282
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by Webdongle » Mon Feb 24, 2014 6:56 pm

+100% NivF007
That expresses it perfectly.
http://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/
https://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/updating-joomla.html
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results": Albert Einstein

User avatar
porwig
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:51 am
Location: Parker, Colorado USA
Contact:

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by porwig » Tue Feb 25, 2014 1:45 am

Hi all, I'm just catching up here. I've been paying more attention to the LGPL thread.

As near as I can tell, the questions and concerns from Cindy, Niv and Webdongle have been responded to, as well as they possibly could be, by a number of folks. My thanks go to Marijke, Dianne, Amy, Jacques, Andrew and Brian for helping out with that!

@Cindy, Niv and Webdongle - You may disagree, but I think the volunteers on OSM has been doing a pretty good job. Certainly we are not perfect, but I believe we have consistently tried to act appropriately and fairly in all areas.

I believe OSM will also continue to try and do better, including with the publicly announced plans to implement community-based oversight changes hopefully beginning next year. I hope you will be patient and appreciate that OSM directors are all volunteers, and understand that sometimes change and improvements take some time.
Paul Orwig

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by NivF007 » Tue Feb 25, 2014 2:23 am

@ Paul - Thank you for your response
As near as I can tell, the questions and concerns from Cindy, Niv and Webdongle have been responded to, as well as they possibly could be, by a number of folks. My thanks go to Marijke, Dianne, Amy, Jacques, Andrew and Brian for helping out with that!
Not quite...

While on the Governance Working Group, my efforts to establish proper, well-defined communications on these matters, from GWG and OSM to the community at large were brushed aside - in fact, weeks have passed and it is still unclear how and under what timelines communications will be provided to the Joomla!/OSM community.

It would be greatly appreciated if these important matters could be addressed with clear concise answers and not further overlooked. I think both myself and WebDongle have been pretty clear on this - and in my last post (I won't repeat it here), I've outlined some very simple suggestions for how that could be accomplished.
@Cindy, Niv and Webdongle - You may disagree, but I think the volunteers on OSM has been doing a pretty good job. Certainly we are not perfect, but I believe we have consistently tried to act appropriately and fairly in all areas.
No. We don't disagree. But we have legitimate concerns and frustrations as well, which we are doing our best to communicate and have addressed - could I politely ask that those concerns and frustrations are responded to?
I believe OSM will also continue to try and do better, including with the publicly announced plans to implement community-based oversight changes hopefully beginning next year.
Again, please review my concerns in my last post about the critical deficiencies (i.e. communications and providing relevant information) and the suggestions as to how those can be remedied.

If there is anything that is wrong or not doable with those specific interim solutions (i.e. any reason they cannot or should not be implemented), please let us know.

I believe these remedies will go a long way, in terms of interim solution, to assist with transparency and to keep the community up-to-date on what's happening behind the scenes - it would also be a positive and constructive outcome for the efforts of all who contributed to this thread.

I think it is understood that the current structure of elections for OSM is a) temporary; b) not ideal; c) under review; d) changes are forthcoming; and e) there is a process in place that will take time.

Best regards,

Niv

User avatar
porwig
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:51 am
Location: Parker, Colorado USA
Contact:

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by porwig » Tue Feb 25, 2014 3:28 am

Niv - I think your questions have already been answered, as best as you can expect to get - either by me or others while you were in the Governance Working Group, in private emails from me, in links that I have shared with you to earlier blog posts, forum discussions and OSM public email list discussions, or by others in this thread.

I understand that you are not satisfied with the current situation, and it seems that you are also not satisfied with some ore all of those previous answers. But simply asking the same questions over and over again isn't going to change things.
Paul Orwig

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by NivF007 » Tue Feb 25, 2014 3:34 am

Paul,

The fact is you are dodging again, as you have in the Governance Working Group, when it comes to an outline of clear communications of these matters to general community, leaving the community totally in the dark - something we are requesting to change and that few very simple steps can be taken to ameliorate. They have been ignored - with no reason provided (again - please review my second last post now).
But simply asking the same questions over and over again isn't going to change things.
As President of OSM, please let us know exactly what will.

Thank you,

Niv

User avatar
Webdongle
Joomla! Master
Joomla! Master
Posts: 37282
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by Webdongle » Tue Feb 25, 2014 4:32 am

On top of the already unanswered questions is another. The OSM are considering including and editor that has a non GPL licence. When questions were asked in the cms mailing list they were avoided like the questions in this thread. Two of us were emailed 'reasons' ... when I posted those reason in the cms thread a member of the PLT threatened censorship
but I will be discussing moderating further posts if the license issue continues to be pushed in this thread
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/joomla- ... RRN5EoS7kJ

Notice that the author of that threat to moderate is the same person that tried to introduce a commercial update component into Joomla when an update component already exists.

The refusal to give straight answers, the trying to take discussions out of the public view and the threat to moderate non accusational non abusive posts ... does not do Joomla any good at all.
http://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/
https://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/updating-joomla.html
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results": Albert Einstein

mbabker
Joomla! Hero
Joomla! Hero
Posts: 2209
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:26 pm

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by mbabker » Tue Feb 25, 2014 5:06 am

Kevin, your post here is off-topic for this thread, but with that said, I will reply this single time.
Webdongle wrote:On top of the already unanswered questions is another. The OSM are considering including and editor that has a non GPL licence.
At no point was it stated that the editor in question is being considered for inclusion. The two contributors indicated they are willing to share it as part of a GSoC project and had introduced it with a note stating that they would change the license as needed to allow it to be included with the CMS IF accepted.
Webdongle wrote:When questions were asked in the cms mailing list they were avoided like the questions in this thread. Two of us were emailed 'reasons' ... when I posted those reason in the cms thread a member of the PLT threatened censorship
mbabker wrote:but I will be discussing moderating further posts if the license issue continues to be pushed in this thread
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/joomla- ... RRN5EoS7kJ
I commented on the moderation after your publishing of the private e-mail, and after I perceived that you and Niv were going to continue to press the issue until you got the answers you wanted, which I perceived as being potentially harassing with regards to that thread. I also alerted the full PLT to the perceived issue and allowed them to react as they felt appropriate.
Webdongle wrote:Notice that the author of that threat to moderate is the same person that tried to introduce a commercial update component into Joomla when an update component already exists.
What does this have to do with anything at present? Are you holding a grudge against me for this situation?

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by NivF007 » Tue Feb 25, 2014 5:21 am

@ Michael

To begin, I agree that discussion is 'off topic' here.

Let's be clear. We had questions regarding licensing of proposed code to be developed and included with Joomla!

We are allowed to ask questions. I still have no response as to why you feel it's okay to attempt to prohibit those questions from being asked. (Please respond on that thread).

Since we've asked those questions, we've got some clarification from Tim Plummer, author of 'Learning Joomla! 3 Extension Development,' which not only provided some of the answers to the questions we were seeking, but is helpful in helping us solve the question of how to approach the issue of a student who wants to be involved - we want that to a positive experience!

We able to move that discussion forward, productively and amicably - Chad, the originator of the discussions and I have had very nice side conversations - and came to a good understanding of the challenges.

Let's respect people's rights to ask questions. It's also better for all of us, IMHO, if we could benefit from direct answers.

Best regards,

Niv

AmyStephen
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion
Posts: 7056
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Nebraska
Contact:

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by AmyStephen » Tue Feb 25, 2014 5:44 am

This is getting to be a problem. There are these time consuming battles with these two in many locations. Responding to them just fuels the fire. The answers are not heard and whomever is involved is eventually pointed to as a problem. It interrupts constructive work. I tried sharing a video resource that I thought was helpful but I doubt it was used. I'm at a loss how to help. Maybe someone has ideas?

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by NivF007 » Tue Feb 25, 2014 6:16 am

@ Amy I don't think the video is relevant or helpful - we are taken about governance issues, not working on a coding project (otherwise it would be relevant). Might I suggest that 'Conflict Resolution in a Community' (https://medium.com/p/1fc1f1150296) as it is much more relevant - but I digress.

We are still trying to get some answers and some positive results.

I'll repeat my post here
A lot of people don't even know about the Governance Working Group - I do not see mention of it on the OSM web site. I believe a description of the GWG on the OSM web site and an invitation to participate there would go a long way to answering questions, helping to alleviate concerns and providing transparency.

Why not list this under the OSM FAQ's as well - (i.e. What efforts at OSM are currently going on to move towards membership acceptance and elections for OSM Directors? and How can one join the Governance Working Group?).

That group appears to me to be doing great work! Let's make sure people in the community are aware of that.
Right now, the circumstances are such that the available information, as it pertains to positive steps being taken is anemic at best, the work of the GWG opaque to anybody from the community who is not part of that group - no timelines have been set on the OSM web site for communications on these matters, no further information provided.

As for the President of OSM, I find Paul's insistence that the questions have been answered and refusals to acknowledge these issues to be completely incorrect, and the continued refusals (instead of simply saying 'yes we can do that') to ensure that all the relevant information is provided on the OSM web site, transparent and communicated publicly - in the one place where that information ought to be provided - as completely unhelpful to finding a positive resolution to the concerns expressed.

I'm still waiting for a reasonable answer as to why there is resistance to taking these very simple steps.

N

AmyStephen
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion
Posts: 7056
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Nebraska
Contact:

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by AmyStephen » Tue Feb 25, 2014 11:58 am

Niv - part of what you would learn in the video is to be respectful of people's time.

Your questions have been answered *multiple times.* Not sure if there is a comprehension issue or if you are just not reading. I've seen this with you before and have actually had to link you back to earlier posts, asking that you reread the content. It is completely inappropriate to ask people over and over and over to answer the same questions. This is *your* problem -- no matter how many times you name and shame and blame others.

Secondly, if you'd watch the video, the presenters recommend projects document their processes and decisions so that they don't have to repeat that information as new people join in. Those links have been shared with you and instead of studying the information and coming to speed you continue to ask questions about material in those archives. It is not respectful to expect people to spoon feed information to you.

Third, you don't respect the knowledge people gain thru years of experience and seem to think that people need to educate you so that you can participate in decisions the project has empowered them to take on behalf of the community. Case in point, the editor licensing discussion. Michael and Chad understand how licenses work with Joomla. They know the rules and nuances of how various assets and licenses work. It's on you to educate yourself if you want to know more. It's not appropriate to sidetrack a discussion about the specific project so that you can use the thread to learn about licenses and force everyone to research with you. If you want to learn about licenses, ask for resources, then go off and spend YOUR time on this. But, don't stop a constructive discussion or expect those who are responsible to spoon feed you.

Fourth, you seem to think everyone is here to answer your questions. That's not the case. People are here to work on Joomla. The discussions are many times going to be over your head because you have not put in the time to understand what they are talking about. You might see developers talking about Interfaces or Dependency Injection. If you are curious what it means, take the terms and search google. But once you start insisting they educate you, you're out of line. From where I stand, you are out of line a lot and you are starting to get more nasty about it.

Fifth, if you are going to continue, find a mentor. That's the only idea I can think of -- find someone who is willing to help you navigate community processes without costing others so much time and frustration.

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by NivF007 » Tue Feb 25, 2014 3:46 pm

Amy, nothing you have just said bares any relevance to the current circumstances.

My question has been as to why there is there is a resistance to being transparent and accountable to the OSM community concerning governance issues.

I'd appreciate it if that would not further avoided with answers that continuously dodge the very important question and waste everybody's time and energy.

Is it possible to stick to the point?

N

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by NivF007 » Tue Feb 25, 2014 4:52 pm

As said, we are still searching for a positive outcome

There is nothing positive to be gained from these questions being further side-stepped or responded to with irrelevant information - so please don't do that anymore.

The questions are dead simple:
I'll repeat my post here
A lot of people don't even know about the Governance Working Group - I do not see mention of it on the OSM web site. I believe a description of the GWG on the OSM web site and an invitation to participate there would go a long way to answering questions, helping to alleviate concerns and providing transparency.

Why not list this under the OSM FAQ's as well - (i.e. What efforts at OSM are currently going on to move towards membership acceptance and elections for OSM Directors? and How can one join the Governance Working Group?).

That group appears to me to be doing great work! Let's make sure people in the community are aware of that.

jgress-
Joomla! Ace
Joomla! Ace
Posts: 1030
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 5:40 pm
Location: Austin, TX, USA

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by jgress- » Tue Feb 25, 2014 6:53 pm

NivF007 wrote: Might I suggest that 'Conflict Resolution in a Community' (https://medium.com/p/1fc1f1150296) as it is much more relevant
i posted this yesterday in its own thread. it is quite a good site/information. http://forum.joomla.org/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=836733.
Co-author Using Joomla, Second Edition (migration/upgrade included) http://www.usingjoomlabook.com
Find a Joomla User Group (JUG) near you http://community.joomla.org/user-groups.html

User avatar
porwig
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:51 am
Location: Parker, Colorado USA
Contact:

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by porwig » Tue Feb 25, 2014 7:21 pm

@Niv - In order to communicate most effectively with the Joomla community, information about the Governance Working Group has been published multiple times on one of the project's highest profile and most interactive communication channels (leadership blogs linked to public forum threads) that is served from one of the project's most prominent and highest traffic websites (community.joomla.org), instead of publishing that informationon one of the project's lowest traffic and least interactive websites (opensourcematters.org).

This is my final response to you in this thread.
Paul Orwig

User avatar
brian
Joomla! Master
Joomla! Master
Posts: 11760
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 7:19 am
Location: Leeds, UK
Contact:

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by brian » Tue Feb 25, 2014 7:24 pm

Thank you Paul
"Exploited yesterday... Hacked tomorrow"
Blog http://brian.teeman.net/
Joomla Hidden Secrets http://hiddenjoomlasecrets.com/

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by NivF007 » Tue Feb 25, 2014 7:35 pm

Please provides the links.

User avatar
montano
Joomla! Ace
Joomla! Ace
Posts: 1184
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 11:38 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by montano » Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:47 pm

OSM BYLAW CHANGES REGARDING OVERSIGHT
Written by Paul Orwig
Wednesday, 08 May 2013 18:04
http://community.joomla.org/blogs/leade ... sight.html

Proposal to dissolve the Community Oversight Committee
Mar 05, 2013 2:59 pm
http://forum.joomla.org/viewtopic.php?f=704&t=793513

Paul's Governance Working Group @JWC
November, 2012
http://www.[youtube].com/watch?v=mQwln_0wxPw

Governance Working Group Meeting @JWC
November, 2013
http://conference.joomla.org/index.php? ... ion&id=136


Governance working group update
January 14, 2014
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic ... Vs7dLYQAnM


Request to the COC for OSM board term extensions
February 8, 2012
Robert Deutz
Javier Gomez
Jacques Rentzke

Motion: one year renewable terms for OSM
November 15, 2012
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic ... TUiljR9CO4
Bylaws updated 4 months later, March 19, 2013

Nominations & Term Renewal Requests
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic ... Vs7dLYQAnM
(if this is an example of a typical conversation, then it is obvious to me why nothing gets done)

User avatar
montano
Joomla! Ace
Joomla! Ace
Posts: 1184
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 11:38 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by montano » Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:05 pm

November 2012
Board votes for term renewals
  • The original bylaws stated that terms would be two years unless otherwise specified.
  • The ability to renew was not allowed in the bylaws.
  • The Class of 2010 had all served 2 years at the time of this vote.
  • Technically, in November 15, 2012 the only active board members were Thomas Hampton,
    Paulo Griiettner, Leonel Canton and Ofer Cohen.
  • Technically, Paul should not have made the motion because his term had already expired.
  • Technically, there are only two current board members, Victor and Joe, who have served less than one year.
  • If the vote to renew terms is null because the members terms who voted has already expired, then there are currently only two legal board member. Right?
Original bylaws
(two year term)
Archived By-laws - 30 June 2009 wrote:
2. ELECTION AND TERM OF DIRECTORS.

Directors will be elected according to the procedure described in Article IV. Each Director's term will last for the term specified in her or his election or, if no such term is specified, for two years. Each Director will serve for the duration of her or his term, or until her or his resignation or removal. Notwithstanding any other provision of these by-laws, if the end of a Director's term would result in there being fewer than three Directors serving the Corporation, then that Director will hold office until her or his successor has been elected, appointed or qualified.
Terms have expired and there is a vote held in November 2012 to extend term limits.
porwig wrote: ARTICLE III - DIRECTORS
2. ELECTION AND TERM OF DIRECTORS.
Directors will be elected according to the procedure described in Article IV. Each Director's term will last for the term specified in her or his election or, if no such term is specified, for two years.

I move that the above paragraph in Article III, Section 2 of the By-laws of Open Source Matters, Inc. be changed to:

Directors will be elected according to the procedure described in Article IV. Each Director's term will last for the term specified in her or his election or, if no such term is specified, for one year. This term may be renewed.
This motion needs a second, and then all board members may vote by responding in this email thread with either a +1 if you agree with the motion, or -1 if you do not agree with the motion. Email motion threads remain open for seven days.

Thanks,

paul
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic ... TUiljR9CO4

RESULTS:
(one year term with indefinite renewals)
Archived By-laws - 15 March 2013 wrote:
2. ELECTION AND TERM OF DIRECTORS.
Directors will be elected according to the procedure described in Article IV. Each Director's term will last for the term specified in her or his election or, if no such term is specified, for one year. This term may be renewed. Each Director will serve for the duration of her or his term, or until her or his resignation or removal. Notwithstanding any other provision of these by-laws, if the end of a Director's term would result in there being fewer than three Directors serving the Corporation, then that Director will hold office until her or his successor has been elected, appointed or qualified.
(one year term with indefinite renewals)
The minute of this meeting have still not been published.
BY-LAWS OF OPEN SOURCE MATTERS, INC. 06 November 2013 wrote: 4.2. ELECTION AND TERM OF DIRECTORS. The Board of Directors shall be elected by the voting Members at the Annual General Meeting. Each Director's term will last for the term specified in her or his election or, if no such term is specified, for one year. This term may be renewed. Each Director will serve for the duration of her or his term, or until her or his resignation or removal. Notwithstanding any other provision of these by-laws, if the end of a Director's term would result in there being fewer than three Directors serving the Corporation, then that Director will hold office until her or his successor has been elected, appointed or qualified.
What else is interesting about the November 2012 bylaws is the move to a member based voting pool.
BY-LAWS OF OPEN SOURCE MATTERS, INC. 06 November 2013 wrote: 3. ARTICLE III - MEMBERS & MEMBERSHIP

3.1. CLASSES AND QUALIFICATIONS. Any individual supportive of this corporation's purposes and not otherwise prohibited by any contract, law or regulation from abiding by the terms of these by-laws is qualified to become a Member of the Corporation. There shall be only one class of Membership.

3.2. RIGHT TO VOTE. Only Members in good standing shall have the right to vote at the Annual General Meeting of the Members on those items specified in Section 3.6 (below), as well as to vote on such other issues as the Board may choose to bring before the Members.

3.3. ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP. Applicants qualified under Section 3.1 above, shall be admitted to membership will be determined on a case by case basis, at the sole discretion of the Board and/or Membership Committee. Any "contributor" to Open Source Matters who is supportive of this corporation's purposes and is not otherwise prohibited by any contract, law or regulation from abiding by the terms of these by-laws shall be eligible for membership. A "contributor" shall be any individual who has contributed to improving Open Source Matters and its projects in any form.

3.4. NUMBER OF MEMBERS. There is no limit on the number of Members the Corporation may admit.
Article III describes the community at large, but the discussion here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TVH ... IuwKc/edit
and Paul's previous posts state that the only "Members" are current and possibly former Board Members, not the community.

The goal of the Governance Working Group is to define who the Members will be for the 2015 election. They will make suggestions but the board that is elected in 2014 does not have to abide by these suggestions.

This is a VERY complex topic and difficult to explain in bullet points. This is my attempt to get everyone up to speed.
Last edited by montano on Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by NivF007 » Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:37 pm

Thanks Cindy, for the links.

1) I asked for those to illustrate a point (it was a challenge to Paul to provide them - given his response).

As you and I are keen on these matters, we can manage, with some effort, to cobble these links together and make some sense of it. However, it's an absurd expectation that anybody, without having special psychic powers, could find all those links and come to an understanding of what the issues are, the planned direction of the GWG and the nature of the current efforts being undertaken.

This is unfortunate as it can be easily remedied. The refusals are surprising.

2) The implicit argument from the President of OSM, is that somehow the OSM web site is not the right place to put information concerning the affairs of OSM (???), but it appears to me, has rather attempted to justify that forcing people to dig through thousands of threads and posts is somehow the better alternative. I guess that is what it is - it's apparent to me that Paul will stick to his guns on this.

---

On another note, I could forgive OSM Directors for changing the by-laws to be more permissive so that they could either remain or self-elect those who they want to serve - that is, if they didn't exclude nominees who had support from the community.

It was thing to include yourself - entirely another bar others (under secretive auspices), especially who have support from the community - and to be told by those people responsible that 'tough decisions' needed to be made. I hope this is not how OSM and Joomla! will continue to operate in the future.

In that respect, I view what has taken place, and what is currently taking place with OSM elections, as most unfair.

Yet, I do not want to take anything away from all the folks who serve on the OSM Board and other Leadership Teams - there are some truly kick-ass people.

My view is that we have taken as strong a stand as we could, were no less than vigorous in our attempts to address these issues (i.e. we didn't simply just sit on our hands), and vested a lot of our time and effort.

I have a lot of faith in those remaining on the board :-) that positive changes will happen - and that they'll see to it that affairs of OSM are run more fairly and democratically.

I think it's time to bow out - for now - and allow for that to happen.

Best,

Niv

AmyStephen
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion
Posts: 7056
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Nebraska
Contact:

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by AmyStephen » Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:48 pm

NivF007 wrote:Thanks Cindy, for the links.

1) I asked for those to illustrate a point (it was a challenge to Paul to provide them - given his response).

As you and I are keen on these matters, we can manage, with some effort, to cobble these links together and make some sense of it.
You are admitting to a complete lack of respect for people's time by asking them to do something you admit you did not need done and could have done yourself. You wasted Cindy's time, too.

http://www.[youtube].com/watch?v=Q52kFL8zVoM

People need to bear it in mind when dealing with you.

User avatar
montano
Joomla! Ace
Joomla! Ace
Posts: 1184
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 11:38 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by montano » Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:02 pm

@Niv
I knew that, but this is devolving and I really want to focus on the topics. There are a lot of people following this conversation but not commenting. Paul stated he was not going to post further, so I collected the links.

@Amy
I appreciate your concern, but I'm a big girl. I'm invested in this topic and no one is wasting my time or making me do something I do not want to do.

I think that constantly posting a link to a video titled "How Open Source Projects Survive Poisonous People (And You Can Too)" is passive aggressive and more than a little bit ironic.It adds no value to the discussion and insults us all.

Because I have the benefit of 9 years on these boards, I can recollect that you, too, have been called all the things you are calling Niv and anyone else here who disagrees with you. @AmyStephen is the poster child for polarizing debates; Niv is just giving you a run for your money.

AmyStephen
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion
Posts: 7056
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Nebraska
Contact:

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by AmyStephen » Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:10 pm

Cindy -

I've said a few times I've had to learn from that video. Totally agree there are parallels to my own experiences and problems I have caused.

It's a sad, sad, truth.

User avatar
jwestley
Joomla! Apprentice
Joomla! Apprentice
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 12:45 am
Location: San Francisco, California, USA
Contact:

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by jwestley » Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:22 pm

Hello All,

I have been following this thread with great interest.

I am someone who was nominated by a respected colleague this month to serve on the OSM Board and would do it if called to action. I believe that if someone is willing to be nominated and wants to serve, then it would only be natural for the community to know who these people are. It is important for the people in the community to know who we are, what we do, and how we would lead. This would build confidence in the process.

It is important for the those on the Board to elect people based on the "whole picture". Not just the perceptions of a few, or if the individual has been critical of OSM at some time in the past. I sincerely hope that it is an unbiased, objective process, so that we can have leaders who are ready for current reality and can make changes accordingly.

This thread, and the concerns shared here, have been talked about for quite a while. What I have been hearing loud and clear is that people see this as an opportunity for change. Many people do not want to wait till 2015 for that change, but I believe that is our only option right now.

I for one will be patient with the OSM Board and the changes that are being proposed and expressed. I hope that we can continue this dialogue in a more effective manner. It is time for a new paradigm for Joomla, and I believe it is already underway in many areas. This new paradigm includes the Framework, CMS, Open Source community relations, etc.. We have a true opportunity here that will be lost if we cannot find the leaders to take us to the next level. There is room for all of us, so I challenge you all to be part of the solution.
James Westley Foreman
Founder http://www.flockworx.com
{ design.develop.engage }

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by NivF007 » Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:40 pm

+1 @ Jwestley
It is time for a new paradigm for Joomla, and I believe it is already underway in many areas. This new paradigm includes the Framework, CMS, Open Source community relations, etc.. We have a true opportunity here that will be lost if we cannot find the leaders to take us to the next level.
Very heartening to read your response as I am bowing out - I have been doing the best I know how to kick that door open and to bring awareness - to put these matters in the realm of the community and stakeholders. (Which is why I have been so persistent that these matters are properly communicated to OSM/Joomla! stakeholders!).

Best,

N

PS

This is a response, after reviewing the GPL/LGPL discussions, from to a critical issue on FB from a very dedicated member of our local user group in Toronto
Holy crap - great volleys back and forth. Is there an actual place to cast a vote?

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by NivF007 » Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:49 pm

@ Amy
Cindy -

I've said a few times I've had to learn from that video. Totally agree there are parallels to my own experiences and problems I have caused.

It's a sad, sad, truth.
If it makes you feel any better, I quite adore you - I have great deal of respect and admiration for you.

I think as Cindy said, I could give you a hell of a run for your money.

Contrary to other opinions regarding conflict - I do not perceive that conflict is this horrible thing that is either detrimental or needs to be avoided at all times.

Sometimes you have to fight a good fight for what it is you believe in - it's a balance, but when one feels that the risk of not fighting hard for something outweighs the conflict it may cause, then it is my humble opinion that the fight, and conflict - are justified - and the right thing to do.

Sorry to use a "sports analogy," but I can't count how many hockey fights I've been in where we've gone out after the game and bought each beers. :-)

So a long distance cheers! :)

N

User avatar
porwig
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:51 am
Location: Parker, Colorado USA
Contact:

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by porwig » Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:52 pm

@Amy - Just to clarify, several weeks ago I shared links with Niv to 2 community.joomla.org blog posts that mentioned the Governance Working Group and their accompanying forum discussion threads, and I also pointed him to the public OSM email list where discussions about the upcoming elections were taking place.

So Niv has had that information for quite a while - it just doesn't fit his chosen view of things.
Paul Orwig

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: RE: Call for OSM Board Nominations - Feb 7, 2014

Post by NivF007 » Tue Feb 25, 2014 11:01 pm

Sorry - one last final add to the above from an alternative to the Google Poisonous Video, https://medium.com/p/1fc1f1150296
If two people agree on everything, one of them is unnecessary
— Winston Churchill
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak. Courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen. — Winston Churchill
@ Paul

I will happily and humbly give you pass on that last comment. It's really up to you whether or not you decide to take a constructive approach.

--

Best to everybody - I have clients and local user group that need my attention - I have to step out for a couple of weeks to hit some deadlines.

Good luck to the nominees!!! And thank you so much for volunteering.

I'm unsubscribing so please do not expect a response from me on governance issues for a while.

N


Locked

Return to “OpenSourceMatters.org”